胆总管结石内镜治疗术式的选择

目的：探讨内镜时代治疗胆总管结石治疗的恰当术式。方法：回顾性分析2004年1月—2008年7月采用ERCP,LC＋ERCP及腹腔镜胆总管探查术（LECBD）等诊断、治疗可疑胆总管结石309例患者的临床资料。结果：有216例行ERCP诊治,其中胆总管结石97例,占44.9%,因可疑胆总管结石行ERCP诊治的患者数逐年减少。93例行LECBD,其中71例成功,22例中转开腹。71例成功者中,经胆总管直接切开途径60例,经胆囊管途径11例,采用一次性胆总管缝合6例,行LECBD治疗的患者数逐年增多。ERCP+LC与LECBD相比两者在手术成功率、出血量、残石率方面差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);LECDB组的手术时间、手术并发症及住院时间均低于LC+ERCP组(均P<0.05)。结论：LECBD治疗胆总管结石优于LC＋ERCP。但在内镜技术高度发展的时代,选择个体化治疗方案是胆总管结石治疗的最佳术式。     

倾向得分匹配法对两种方法治疗胆总管结石的疗效再评价

目的：再评价腹腔镜胆总管探查术与开腹手术治疗胆总管结石的疗效。 方法：收集我院2012年1月—2014年1月手术治疗的92例胆总管结石患者临床资料,其中34例行腹腔镜胆总管探（腹腔镜组）,58例行开腹手术（开腹组）,采用倾向得分匹配法（PSM）均衡组间混杂因素的影响,比较匹配后两组患者的临床指标。 结果：经PSM法成功匹配30对患者,所有基线资料在组间分布均衡。两组患者的手术时间差异无统计学意义（P=0.190）,腹腔镜组术中出血量明显少于开腹组,且胃肠功能恢复时间及住院时间也明显短于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）;两组患者术后并发症发生率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论：腹腔镜胆总管探查术治疗胆总管结石较开腹手术具有微创,术中失血少,术后恢复快,住院时间短,再评价结果与以往研究一致。

     

成人先天性胆总管囊肿的诊断与治疗

目的：探讨成人先天性胆总管囊肿的诊断及治疗。
方法：回顾性分析近10余年来共收治的78例成人先天性胆总管囊肿患者临床资料。
结果：78例患者中,接受手术治疗手术治疗74例,其中术式包括：（1）囊肿完整切除、肝总管空肠端侧吻合52例;（2）囊肿大部分切除、肝总管空肠端侧吻合9例;（3）胰十二指肠切除术2例（其中1例为胆总管下端囊肿癌变）;（4）11例癌变患者1例行胰十二指肠切除术,7例行胆管癌根治术,3例行姑息性外引流术;（5）1例患者因合并胆总管囊肿破裂出血并胆汁性腹膜炎而行单纯外引流术。74例手术患者中获随访54例,随访率为73.0%,随访2个月至7年,平均39个月,良性患者情况良好。癌变患者中,1例行胰十二指肠切除术患者失访,7例行胆管癌根治术患者5例得到随访,生存期2~5年,中位生存时间2.3年,3例行姑息性手术患者生存期2~16个月,中位生存时间7.8个月。
结论：成人先天性胆总管囊肿易发生癌变,早期诊断、早期治疗是先天性胆总管囊肿诊治的关键所在,其治疗以手术切除囊肿及胆-肠重建为基本原则。

     

十二指肠镜联合胆道镜治疗胆总管末段嵌顿残余结石

目的：评价十二指肠镜和胆道镜联合治疗胆总管末段嵌顿残余结石的方法和疗效。
方法：回顾性分析1998年3月—2010年5月98例胆总管末段嵌顿残余结石患者,包括急性重症胆管炎术后20例,胆囊结石继发胆总管结石术后66例,肝胆管结石术后12例,经十二指肠镜和胆道镜联合治疗的临床资料。
结果：98例患者十二指肠镜和胆道镜联合治疗技术均实施成功,一次成功取石成功者95例（96.9%）,二次取石成功者3（3.1%）例,所有患者胆总管末段嵌顿残余结石均被取净。1例发生急性胰腺炎（1.0%）,9例发生高淀粉酶血症（9.2%）,无胆道穿孔、出血等严重并发症。
结论：十二指肠镜和胆道镜联合治疗胆管残余结石具有安全、有效、操作简单、微创等优点,是治疗胆总管末段嵌顿残余结石的理想选择。

     

腹腔镜下联合胆道镜经胆囊管胆总管取石术的应用:附82例报告

目的:探讨腹腔镜下联合胆道镜经胆囊管胆总管取石（LTCBDE）的可能性及应用技巧。
方法:对82例胆囊结石并胆总管结石患者采用LTCBDE治疗的临床资料进行回顾性分析。术前均经MRCP检查确诊。
结果:82例手术均获得成功,无1例中转开腹,术中出血30~80 mL,术中、术后未发生严重并发症。术后住院天数4~6 d。82例随访3个月至1年未发现胆管狭窄或残余结石。
结论:掌握合适的适应证,LTCBDE是治疗胆囊结石和并胆总管结石的合理术式。

     

同一术者ERCP+LC与LECBD+LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的对比分析

目的 比较同一术者操作的内镜下逆行性胆胰管造影+腹腔镜胆囊切除术（ERCP＋LC）和腹腔镜胆总管探查+腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LECBD+LC）两种微创手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法 收集2017 年1 月至2018 年7 月期间香港大学深圳医院肝胆胰外科收治的胆囊结石合并胆总管结石病例102 例,患者接受同一术者操作的ERCP+LC（n=65）或LECBD+LC（n=37）,对两组手术中转率、胆总管结石清除率、手术时间、手术出血量、术后并发症发生率、住院时间等临床数据进行统计比较。结果 ERCP+LC组在手术时间[（129.88±47.91）min vs （183.54±74.75）min,P＜0.05]、住院时间[（7.15±3.14）d vs（ 10.68±5.00）d,P＜0.05]方面优于LECBD+LC组;在手术中转率、胆总管结石清除率、手术出血量、手术并发症发生率方面,两组无统计学差异（P＞0.05）。结论 ERCP+LC和LECBD+LC均是治疗胆总管结石合并胆囊结石的有效方法,应该根据患者的具体情况进行选择,术者同时熟练掌握两种方法才可能使患者获益。     

快速康复外科在腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术中的应用

目的：探讨快速康复外科理念在腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术（LCBDE）中的应用价值。
方法：对60例择期行LCBDE患者,采用快速康复外科理念指导下的围术期处理方法（n=28）和传统的围术期处理方法（n=32）,比较两组术后下床活动时间、进食时间、排气排便时间、住院天数及住院费用、并发症的差异。
结果：快速康复外科组术后进食时间、排便排气时间、下床活动时间、住院天数明显缩短、住院费用明显减少（P<0.05）,两组术后并发症比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。
结论：快速康复外科理念在LCBDE患者中的应用安全、经济、有效,具有较高的临床应用价值。

     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转开腹的的危险因素分析及防范

目的：分析腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转开腹手术的潜在危险因素并探讨其防范措施。
方法：回顾性分析收治的786例行LC患者的临床资料,并进行Logistic回归分析。
结果：786例LC手术中转开腹50例,中转率为6.4%。体质量、上腹部手术史、急性胆囊炎次数（＞5次）、胆囊壁厚度是中转开腹的独立高危因素。
结论：LC中转开腹手术的潜在危险因素较多,评估其危险因素有利于适时中转开腹。

     

腹腔镜指导下纤维胆道镜胆总管探查术的临床应用

目的讨腹腔镜指导下纤维胆道镜胆总管探查术可行性及应用价值。方法对具有胆道探查指征的患者,施行腹腔镜下胆总管切开,经此切开处置入胆道镜进行检查和治疗。探查完成后,放置T管或I期缝合胆总管。结果全组施行此术式152例,发现肝外胆管结石141例,术中结石取净率为100%;探查阴性11例。胆道镜检查和/或协助取石时间为8～35 min,平均15 min。152例微创手术均成功,无1例中转开腹,腹腔镜下胆总管Ⅰ期缝合42例,放置T管引流110例,术后3～4周拔T管,无1例结石残留;并发胆瘘2例,未发现有胆道狭窄及残石病例。术后住院时间4～7 d,平均为5 d。152例均获随访,随访时间为1～17个月,平均为8个月。经B超或MRCP证实,未发现有胆道狭窄及残石者。结论腹腔镜指导下纤维胆道镜胆总管探查术是安全、有效的方法,微创效果明显,如能在取净结石的情况下行胆总管一期缝合,微创效果尤为明显。     

LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY AND MANAGEMENT OF CHOLEDOCHOLITHIASIS

The advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has led to a reassessment of the approach to the management of choledocholithiasis. In a consecutive series of 418 patients undergoing LC, common bile duct (CBD) stones were suspected pre-operatively in 130 patients. Forty-five of the patients (35%) were found to have CBD stones on either pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP; 20) or on operative cholangiography (OC; 25). Common bile duct stones were detected on OC in a further 12 of 288 patients (4.2%) without pre-operative suspicion of choledocholithiasis. Of the total of 57 patients with CBD stones, the duct was cleared by pre-operative ERCP and endoscopic sphincter-otomy (ES) in 15 patients. In 13 patients, two of whom had had a pre-operative ERCP and ES, duct clearance was achieved by relaxing the sphincter pharmacologically and flushing the CBD via the OC catheter. One patient had an on-table ERCP and ES with successful stone extraction during LC. Eleven patients were converted to open operation with bile duct exploration. Sixteen patients had a postoperative ERCP. In five patients the CBD stones had passed spontaneously in the time between LC and ERCP. Ten patients required ES to clear the duct of stones. One patient had a failed ERCP and is still awaiting a repeat. The remaining patient was scheduled, but did not return for follow-up ERCP. In summary, pre-operative ERCP was indicated in less than 10% of patients in this series. It was possible to deal with over one-third of CBD stones found at LC by the simple technique of pharmacological relaxation of the spincter of Oddi and flushing the duct through the cholangiogram catheter. Of the patients who required follow-up ERCP, one third had passed their CBD stones by the time of the examination and the rest required ES for stone extraction. Less than 3% of the entire series of patients were converted to open operation for exploration of the common bile duct.     

Technical aspects in the laparoscopic management of complicated common bile duct stones

The management of common bile duct (CBD) stones traditionally required open laparotomy and bile duct exploration. With the advent of endoscopic and laparoscopic technology in the latter half of last century, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the mainstream treatment for CBD stones and gallstones in most medical centers around the world. However, in certain situations, ERCP cannot be feasible because of difficult cannulation and extraction. ERCP can also be associated with potential serious complications, in particular for complicated stones requiring repeated sessions and additional maneuvers. Since our first laparoscopic exploration of the CBD (LECBD) in 1995, we now adopt the routine practice of the laparoscopic approach in dealing with endoscopically irretrievable CBD stones. The aim of this article is to describe the technical details of this approach and to review the results from our series.     

Must ERCP Be routinely performed if choledocholithiasis is suspected?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the diagnosis and treatment of those patients suspected of harboring bile duct stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,235 consecutive LCs performed between 1991 and 1997 were studied prospectively. ERCP was performed to explore the common bile duct (CBD) preoperatively when choledocholithiasis was suspected on the basis of clinical, analytical or echographical data. RESULTS: ERCPs were performed in 268 patients: unsuccessful CBD evaluation in 3%; dilated CBD without lithiasis in 13%, and normal exploration in 37% (99 patients). CBD stones were found in 46% (124 patients), and endoscopic sphincterotomy was then performed and stone extraction attempted. Endoscopic therapy achieved 92.8% successful removal of CBD stones (115 patients). There was no ERCP-related mortality and the morbidity rate was 6%. Retained CBD stones have been observed in 7 cases after ERCP-LC; all of them have been successfully treated by ERCP. CONCLUSIONS: A combined approach to bile duct stones with selective use of ERCP followed by LC is a good therapeutical alternative. Nevertheless, the usual selection criteria for ERCP may lead to unnecessary exploration. It appears to be necessary to modify the current diagnostic and therapeutic strategy. Copyright Copyright 1999 S.Karger AG, Basel     

Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct in difficult choledocholithiasis

Background This review investigated the role played by laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LECBD) in the management of difficult choledocholithiasis.Methods This retrospective study reviewed a prospective database of LECBD for difficult choledocholithiasis during the period 1995 to 2003.Results Of the 97 LECBDs performed in the authors center from 1995 to 2003, 25 were performed for difficult choledocholithiasis. Difficult choledocholithiasis was defined as failure of endoscopic stone retrieval for the following reasons: access and cannulation difficulty, the difficult nature of common bile duct (CBD) stones, and the presence of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related complications. There were seven unsuccessful cannulations because of previous gastrectomy (n = 5) and periampullary diverticulum (n = 2). Among the 18 patients with failed endoscopic extraction, there were 10 impacted stones, 2 incomplete stone clearances after multiple attempts, 2 type 2 Mirizzi syndromes, 1 proximal stent migration, 1 repeated post-ERCP pancreatitis, 1 situs inversus, and 1 stricture at the distal common bile duct. There were 14 male and 11 female patients with a mean age of 67.8 ± 15 years. Initial presentations included cholangitis (n = 14, 56%), biliary colic (n = 3, 12%), jaundice/deranged liver function (n = 5, 20%), cholecystitis (n = 2, 8%), and pancreatitis (n = 1, 4%). Regarding the approach for LECBD, there were 2 transcystic duct explorations and 23 choledochotomies. The mean operative time was 149.4 ± 49.3 min, and there were three conversions (12%). The stone clearance rate was 100%, and no recurrence was detected during a mean follow-up period of 16.8 months. Five complications were encountered, which included bile leak (3 patients) and wound infection (2 patients). When the results were compared with the remaining 72 LECBDs for nondifficult stones during the same period, the complication rate, conversion rate, and rate of residual stones were similar despite a longer operation time (149.4 ± 49.4 min vs 121.6 ± 50.5 min).Conclusion When ERCP is impossible or stone retrieval is incomplete, LECBD is the solution to difficult CBD stones.     

Comparison of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized study

Background

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration are safe and efficient methods that have recently been used for the treatment of bile duct stones. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and surgical outcomes of the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC).

Methods

One hundred twenty patients were prospectively randomized into 2 groups: LCBDE with LC in a single intervention and LC after ERCP.

Results

The success rate of the LCBDE+LC group (96.5%) was found to be higher than for the ERCP+LC group (94.4%). Complication rates of the LCBDE+LC and ERCP+LC group were 7% and 11.1%, respectively. Complications requiring ERCP in the postoperative period after LCBDE+LC have been noted in 3.5% of cases.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic CBD exploration provides an alternative therapeutic approach that has less morbidity, is cost-effective, and allows earlier recovery with a reduced period of short-term disability.     

内镜与腹腔镜联合一期与二期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石疗效的前瞻性研究

【摘要】 目的 探讨一期与二期腹腔镜联合内镜的不同治疗方法对胆囊结石同时合并胆总管结石患者的治疗疗效及安全性。 方法〓104例符合标准的患者分为2组:一期腹腔镜胆总管探查联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LCBDE+LC组,n=55)和二期内镜逆行性胰胆管造影术联合Oddi括约肌切开序贯腹腔镜胆囊切除术(ERCP/S+LC组,n=49)。分析探讨两组患者手术成功率、术后并发症和术后住院时间的差异。 结果〓两组患者在流行病学和临床病例特点方面无明显差异,提示两组患者具有可比性。LCBDE+LC组和ERCP/S+LC组的患者手术成功率相近(分别为90.0%和95.9%, P=0.309),但ERCP/S+LC组的患者结石清除率更高(分别为93.6%和80.0%, P=0.046),两组患者术后并发症发生率无明显差异。此外,两组患者在术后住院时间和总体住院费用方面亦相近。在术后随访期间,LCBDE+LC组和ERCP/S+LC组分别有5.9%(3/51)和6.3%(3/48)的患者发现胆总管结石残留,差异无显著的统计学意义。结论〓胆囊结石同时合并胆总管结石的一期和二期双镜联合治疗方法具有相近的成功率,术后并发症发生率相若,远期复发无明显差异,但二期双镜联合治疗的手术结石清除率更高。     

腹腔镜老年胆囊切除术联合胆总管探查取石术98例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜下胆总管探查取石术(LCBDE)联合胆囊切除术(LC)对老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果,为此类疾病的临床治疗提供新的参考。 方法采用前瞻性研究的方法对2012年1月至2016年12月收治的老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者98例进行研究,随机分为LCBDE＋LC组49例和ERCP/EST＋LC组49例;LCBDE＋LC组给予LCBDE＋LC手术治疗,ERCP/EST＋LC组患者采取内镜逆行胆管造影/内镜下括约肌切开取石术(ERCP/EST)联合LC手术治疗。采用SPSS 21.0进行统计分析,手术成功率、结石残存率、并发症发生率等组间比较卡方检验分析;术中术后的各项指标的计量资料采用均数±标准差表示,组间比较采用t检验;P<0.05差异有统计学意义。 结果LCBDE＋LC与ERCP/EST＋LC组比较：手术成功率、复查后结石残留率组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),提示两种手术方法效果相当。LCBDE＋LC组术中术后各项指标显著优于ERCP/EST＋LC组(P<0.05);术后并发症发生率低于ERCP/EST＋LC组,提示LCBDE＋LC组手术安全性高于对照组患者(P<0.05)。 结论采用LCBDE＋LC与ERCP/EST＋LC治疗老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效相当,但LCBDE＋LC手术方法的安全性更好,手术时间短、出血量少且手术费用低,可作为老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石临床治疗的首选方法之一。